We are a good team with a bad QB

Originally posted by 9ernick:I personally thought smith looked like he was throwing the interceptions on purpose. The way he smiled after he screwed up its hard to believe that he doesn't have money against the 9ers to win!! Maybe to suppliment the cash he had to give up !
seriously though I really hope he gets it together or gets traded. We kept begging for him to open up the passing game and this is what we get. Like sing said

yea he was doing it all on purpose. It is all Smith's fault that the WR's tipped the ball 10 feet in the air.

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:we are a good team with a bad offensive line

Can't blame this game on the o-line. They weren't horrendous. they gave hime time he just takes a while lol. THis is a lack of a good qb loss. Smith didn't even give Crabrtee the time of day this afternoon, wtf!!

From MM Twitter:

Quote:Don't blame 49ers O-line for Sunday's loss. Protection held up well despite array of Titans' blitzes and 51 quarterback dropbacks.

Oline wasn't as bad as it has been. Still Smith wasn't getting the normal 3 seconds needed to pass.

Maybe they held up on the LEFT side, but the right side was a joke. Snyder was ridiculous and I counted at least 3 blown blocks. I don't know what MM was seeing, but it was clear Young had more time than Smith. Smith is playing because of his mobility - so just because you can OUTRUN sacks means the OL is better? Nope. Sorry I disagree with MM. The fumble Smith has was clearly because Snyder was beaten by a spin move on a 4-man rush.

Snyder was beaten, but if that happened to Tom Brady he would have simply stepped up in the pocket and completed a pass, and nobody would have cared that the RT let his guy get washed around to the outside.

You see if the quarterback steps up, it allows the tackles to recover on their block and simply "wash" the player around the pocket. However, if they don't step up, the quarterback has a good chance of getting hit.
Sometimes there is no space to step up, but on that play, there was clearly enough space.

Its tough to be critical, but sorry, this is the NFL, and pocket presence is the skill that separates the good quarterbacks from the rest.

Are you serious? Snyder was beat so quickly he didn't even have time to hold. If you would have watched Brady at the beginning of this year, you would have notice protection problems allowed the Broncos who aren't as talented BEAT the Broncos.

You have to be able to direct the pass rush to "wash" a player, and certainly your OGs have to be good enough to direct the rush. If it's simply an issue of "stepping up", Shaun Hill wouldn't be on the bench.

I find it near incredible that you are going to even compare our line to the WORST of the Patriot OL.

Just wow.

The only comparison I am making, is our quarterbacks vs Tom Brady. Which is obviously an extreme comparison, because Brady is, IMO, the best quarterback in the NFL and one of the best of all-time.

The extreme comparison serves to accentuate the fact that a quarterback can help his line by stepping up into the pocket.

Every time I have seen Brady play, he makes plays like this. He makes more than a handful each game. The rush comes around the edge, and he simply steps up in the pocket while continuously scanning down field, and then makes the throw.

There was a play he made this year, where his own lineman was pushed into him, and he simply took one step forward without even turning his head, and still completed the pass.

Do you think if a lineman ran into Smith from behind, he would react like that?
Smith would freak out (like most quarterbacks) and start sprinting out of the pocket, perhaps trying to scramble or find a route working back to him.

But Brady isn't the only quarterback who would have survived on that play.
Brady, McNabb, Roethlisberger, Manning, Warner, Romo, Favre, Palmer perhaps even Ryan and Flacco, would have stepped up into the empty space and given themselves more time.

Watch them play, they do it all the time. They make it look so routine that nobody bothers to realize how impressive they are at avoiding the pressure. Brady is the best of them all at this skill, which is why I use him as the most explicit example.

Every single one of those QBs have better OLs than the 49ers - and have had better lines for 2 years. Again, you can say it's just Smith but it's not. The 49ers are the only team in relations to those who rotate linemen 2 out of 5 positions on the right side. Remember starting Snyder for a series and then Rachal for series? That's a sign of a bad OL. Tony Pashos cut by the JAGS (who obviously has too much talent on their OL /sarcasm) is immediately better than the guy penciled in to start?

I do watch these guys play all the time. Let's look at McNabb. When he's harassed, he throws picks - like he did on Sunday night and a couple of weeks ago against the Raiders. Hill wasn't lighting it up before Alex started. The running game wasn't blowing opponents off the ball were they.

Every single one of those QBs have better coaching and talent at the OL than the 49ers. You extreme comparison only reinforces what I'm saying here:

The 49ers are not a good team and this is the ultimate team sport. Take your stopwatch and time, step-up or not, how quickly the rush even forces or alters the QBs rhythm. Say what you want about surviving or stepping up, none - and I mean none of those QBs do it EVERY play. 49er QBs (Smith, Hill) have to do it EVERY play.

Still, the common thread in each of those teams is that their quarterbacks are better than ours and lets face it, this is a QB driven league. We are a good team without a QB and a good O-line imo. But the O-line this game didn't lose us the game this week.

I think we have receivers that would hit their stride with an awesome QB and we know we have a good TE. A good TE that cannot stop drive killing penalties, but a good TE never the less.

We have a decent defense that is good enough to get us in the playoffs I believe. We still do lack a pass rush and for all the key names in the secondary it is appauling to me that we have that bad of a pass D. Number 2 rush D and terrible pass D. We do need some safety help, but overall a decent defense.

Pass D is dragging us out of the top 10 and into the 20's Very pathetic because I also believe we have a good coordinator in Manusky and a good HC in Singletary. That is my take, I could be way off base however that is how I see it

I do think this season is kind of toast but stranger things have happened. Our only wins in week one against AZ without key players, against Seattle without key players and against the Lambs. Just WOW. Kinda hard to keep the grin on

Yes, this a QB-driven league, but you don't need outstanding QB play to win. Last season, Miami, Atlanta, etc proved that if you have a solid running game and a solid defense you will be in contention.

The assumption is that we have the personnel in place to make a good decision on a QB, and furthermore - even develop one.

I totally disagree that the OL didn't "lose" us the game this week - it's like saying on defense, we didn't lose a game because we didn't need to get pressure on the QB from the DL. Trench play.

The QB play is better than our BECAUSE their OL is better. Warner was considered washed up 3 seasons ago and was considered nothing more than a back-up. Why? Because the Rams OL had broken down and it wasn't any good. Goes to Cardinals where a former Steeler OL coach replaces Warhop, they figure out how to pass block and the rest is history.

When your OL is bad, you are set-up to lose EVERY week because you can't consistently run the ball despite the defensive front. Why is Alex even starting? Why are we even going to a "spread" formation? Because this line can't run-block. Why do we pass more than run? Because they aren't a "power run" offense that blow open holes for their best offensive player.

So we have a crucible here - they can't run block and they have difficulty pass-protecting; isn't that - well offense? And this has been the case all season. How is this not attributed to the OL.

Sorry, but in all of the examples you use, if I compare man for man the OL those QBs play behind, they're head-and-shoulders playing better - and this is before Smith started. When we were a power rushing offense under Hill, we were on pace for tops in sacks allowed. A running team on pace for tops in the league for sacks allowed. Sorry, but that's not just the QB.

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:we are a good team with a bad offensive line

Can't blame this game on the o-line. They weren't horrendous. they gave hime time he just takes a while lol. THis is a lack of a good qb loss. Smith didn't even give Crabrtee the time of day this afternoon, wtf!!

From MM Twitter:

Quote:Don't blame 49ers O-line for Sunday's loss. Protection held up well despite array of Titans' blitzes and 51 quarterback dropbacks.

Oline wasn't as bad as it has been. Still Smith wasn't getting the normal 3 seconds needed to pass.

Maybe they held up on the LEFT side, but the right side was a joke. Snyder was ridiculous and I counted at least 3 blown blocks. I don't know what MM was seeing, but it was clear Young had more time than Smith. Smith is playing because of his mobility - so just because you can OUTRUN sacks means the OL is better? Nope. Sorry I disagree with MM. The fumble Smith has was clearly because Snyder was beaten by a spin move on a 4-man rush.

Snyder was beaten, but if that happened to Tom Brady he would have simply stepped up in the pocket and completed a pass, and nobody would have cared that the RT let his guy get washed around to the outside.

You see if the quarterback steps up, it allows the tackles to recover on their block and simply "wash" the player around the pocket. However, if they don't step up, the quarterback has a good chance of getting hit.
Sometimes there is no space to step up, but on that play, there was clearly enough space.

Its tough to be critical, but sorry, this is the NFL, and pocket presence is the skill that separates the good quarterbacks from the rest.

Are you serious? Snyder was beat so quickly he didn't even have time to hold. If you would have watched Brady at the beginning of this year, you would have notice protection problems allowed the Broncos who aren't as talented BEAT the Broncos.

You have to be able to direct the pass rush to "wash" a player, and certainly your OGs have to be good enough to direct the rush. If it's simply an issue of "stepping up", Shaun Hill wouldn't be on the bench.

I find it near incredible that you are going to even compare our line to the WORST of the Patriot OL.

Just wow.

The only comparison I am making, is our quarterbacks vs Tom Brady. Which is obviously an extreme comparison, because Brady is, IMO, the best quarterback in the NFL and one of the best of all-time.

The extreme comparison serves to accentuate the fact that a quarterback can help his line by stepping up into the pocket.

Every time I have seen Brady play, he makes plays like this. He makes more than a handful each game. The rush comes around the edge, and he simply steps up in the pocket while continuously scanning down field, and then makes the throw.

There was a play he made this year, where his own lineman was pushed into him, and he simply took one step forward without even turning his head, and still completed the pass.

Do you think if a lineman ran into Smith from behind, he would react like that?
Smith would freak out (like most quarterbacks) and start sprinting out of the pocket, perhaps trying to scramble or find a route working back to him.

But Brady isn't the only quarterback who would have survived on that play.
Brady, McNabb, Roethlisberger, Manning, Warner, Romo, Favre, Palmer perhaps even Ryan and Flacco, would have stepped up into the empty space and given themselves more time.

Watch them play, they do it all the time. They make it look so routine that nobody bothers to realize how impressive they are at avoiding the pressure. Brady is the best of them all at this skill, which is why I use him as the most explicit example.

Every single one of those QBs have better OLs than the 49ers - and have had better lines for 2 years. Again, you can say it's just Smith but it's not. The 49ers are the only team in relations to those who rotate linemen 2 out of 5 positions on the right side. Remember starting Snyder for a series and then Rachal for series? That's a sign of a bad OL. Tony Pashos cut by the JAGS (who obviously has too much talent on their OL /sarcasm) is immediately better than the guy penciled in to start?

I do watch these guys play all the time. Let's look at McNabb. When he's harassed, he throws picks - like he did on Sunday night and a couple of weeks ago against the Raiders. Hill wasn't lighting it up before Alex started. The running game wasn't blowing opponents off the ball were they.

Every single one of those QBs have better coaching and talent at the OL than the 49ers. You extreme comparison only reinforces what I'm saying here:

The 49ers are not a good team and this is the ultimate team sport. Take your stopwatch and time, step-up or not, how quickly the rush even forces or alters the QBs rhythm. Say what you want about surviving or stepping up, none - and I mean none of those QBs do it EVERY play. 49er QBs (Smith, Hill) have to do it EVERY play.

I don't think Smith is a top ten quarterback. Without a top ten quarterback, its very difficult to compete for a championship, regardless of what other personnel you may have.

In the era of the salary cap, if you don't have a top quarterback, you'll be lucky to grind out a championship with a great defense.
I think its easier to find a top quarterback then build a 2000 Ravens type of defense.
The bottom line is that most championships are won by great quarterbacks. Great quarterbacks find success no matter what team you put them on.

The Colts were nothing before Manning came along. Then all of a sudden they have a great defense, wide receivers, running backs, TE's, O-line? Please.
Atlanta was nothing before Ryan came along. Then, all of a sudden they have a great defense, wide receivers, running backs, TE's, O-line? Please.
What were the Cardinals doing before Warner came along? Nothing.
What were the Saints doing before Brees came along? Nothing.
The Patriots were a "good" team before Brady came along. He turned them into a dynasty.
The Steelers were a good team before they brought in Roethlisberger, but now they are becoming a dynasty, because they have a quarterback who not only avoids the rush but breaks TACKLES (sacks) and turns them into first downs and touchdowns.

The Giant's Super Bowl win is almost an anomaly, Eli is not IMO a great quarterback, but he played like one in the fourth quarter of the Super Bowl. And Brady had the least amount of time I have seen a player have in a Super Bowl (yet he still almost won), because the Giants defense played like a 2000 Ravens defense in that game.

So perhaps we can do what the Giants did, and eke out a Super Bowl. But I just wouldn't count on something like that happening again for a while.

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:It's time we realize that Smith is simply not the answer. I think Shaun Hill is a great QB, but ultimately a great backup and not a sufficient starter. We need a QB because this is a QB league. What scares me is that we waste the years we have on the D on this bad QB and not allow ourselves to become a good team because of that. Bears and Ravens are teams that come to mind. Teams that couldn't get to the next level because of a lack at QB. The Texans were in a similar spot. When a good QB comes to a team the whole dynamic changes. Some QBs can function in systems, but unfortunately we don't have McDaniels to create a QB friendly system for us, and will need someone who has legitimate NFL talent. Smith is not clutch, he can't pick defenses apart, he's not a great leader and his athletic ability, while good, is nothing to write home about. Most of all, his accuracy is lacking. Here are some options

FA:
Just like the Saints did with Brees. Is there a good FA QB on the market? No way, there never is anymore.

Trade:
The one name that comes to mind is Kevin Kolb. I think he's a good QB, whose learned from one of the better QB experts in the game. He may be in a similar position that Shaub or Cassle were in.

Draft:
This seems like the obvious choice. Claussen, Tebow, Locker, Bradford, Snead, Pike, McCoy. One of these guys will be good. Not all, but at least one. Lets identify him and use our 2 first round picks wisely

Any other suggestions? We already have a QB on the roster? Blockbuster trade of all our picks for a starter? Hope Hassleback gets cut, etc. etc.??? (BTW, I just brought up these last 3 as alternatives, but clearly think all are terrible options).

This is one of those post were we need to think before we type . Read your post then realize how stupid it is and then delete it .

cangradulations. You've managed to write an offensive post that doesn't actually offer anything of value. What don't you like about it? Which part is stupid? You're a noob and don't exactly have much offering to the board. I would suggest you post something of value, rather than an idiotic comment that sounds like it's coming from
someone with an IQ in the single digits.

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:It's time we realize that Smith is simply not the answer. I think Shaun Hill is a great QB, but ultimately a great backup and not a sufficient starter. We need a QB because this is a QB league. What scares me is that we waste the years we have on the D on this bad QB and not allow ourselves to become a good team because of that. Bears and Ravens are teams that come to mind. Teams that couldn't get to the next level because of a lack at QB. The Texans were in a similar spot. When a good QB comes to a team the whole dynamic changes. Some QBs can function in systems, but unfortunately we don't have McDaniels to create a QB friendly system for us, and will need someone who has legitimate NFL talent. Smith is not clutch, he can't pick defenses apart, he's not a great leader and his athletic ability, while good, is nothing to write home about. Most of all, his accuracy is lacking. Here are some options

FA:
Just like the Saints did with Brees. Is there a good FA QB on the market? No way, there never is anymore.

Trade:
The one name that comes to mind is Kevin Kolb. I think he's a good QB, whose learned from one of the better QB experts in the game. He may be in a similar position that Shaub or Cassle were in.

Draft:
This seems like the obvious choice. Claussen, Tebow, Locker, Bradford, Snead, Pike, McCoy. One of these guys will be good. Not all, but at least one. Lets identify him and use our 2 first round picks wisely

Any other suggestions? We already have a QB on the roster? Blockbuster trade of all our picks for a starter? Hope Hassleback gets cut, etc. etc.??? (BTW, I just brought up these last 3 as alternatives, but clearly think all are terrible options).

Originally posted by BrianGO: In the era of the salary cap, if you don't have a top quarterback, you'll be lucky to grind out a championship with a great defense.
I think its easier to find a top quarterback then build a 2000 Ravens type of defense.
The bottom line is that most championships are won by great quarterbacks. Great quarterbacks find success no matter what team you put them on.

The Colts were nothing before Manning came along. Then all of a sudden they have a great defense, wide receivers, running backs, TE's, O-line? Please.
Atlanta was nothing before Ryan came along. Then, all of a sudden they have a great defense, wide receivers, running backs, TE's, O-line? Please.
What were the Cardinals doing before Warner came along? Nothing.
What were the Saints doing before Brees came along? Nothing.
The Patriots were a "good" team before Brady came along. He turned them into a dynasty.
The Steelers were a good team before they brought in Roethlisberger, but now they are becoming a dynasty, because they have a quarterback who not only avoids the rush but breaks TACKLES (sacks) and turns them into first downs and touchdowns.

For everything that has been said here, IMO this list makes a point that is very very hard to argue against.

1 bad game and Smiths a bust right.....and one of the jr QB's is going to save us next year right???.....you people are shockingly foolish......it's a;most like you guys want the Kid to do bad so it proves your point......here's an idea....why not give him the other 8 games to progress and prove himself........I MEAN FOR THE LOVE OF EVERYTHING HOLY NO QB IS PERFECT....STEVE AND JOE HAD BAD GAMES TOO......!!!! A RODGERS THREW 3 PICKS AND LOST TO THE BUCKS....IS HE GARBAGE TOO?

Originally posted by boomer49er:Was it well when Snydey gave an end a free run at SMith which resulted in a fumble? Was it well when Smith was wrapped up at the same time that he got the ball from the center?

All QBs have bad games, you dont' bench them for it....we'll never be good again if you do that.

Please understand where I'm coming from. This isn't "Smith had a bad game let's bench him", this is pointing out that I don't think he's the answer, and our 2010 starting QB (or at least our future starting QB) is NOT on this roster. Not bench him, but rather, don't put yet another season (2010) into his hands.

We're a good team on the verge of better things but held back by a disappointing offensive line, a defense with tendencies to give up big plays a couple times a game, and a lack of "the guy" at the QB position. We're doing the best we can with the investments of the previous regime (Smith) and a sometimes-efficient lifetime back-up (Hill). I wouldn't use the word "bad" to describe our QB situation, but as GM mentioned above, this is a QB-driven league and we'll only go so far as our starting QB...and offensive line.

Originally posted by BrianGO: In the era of the salary cap, if you don't have a top quarterback, you'll be lucky to grind out a championship with a great defense.
I think its easier to find a top quarterback then build a 2000 Ravens type of defense.
The bottom line is that most championships are won by great quarterbacks. Great quarterbacks find success no matter what team you put them on.

The Colts were nothing before Manning came along. Then all of a sudden they have a great defense, wide receivers, running backs, TE's, O-line? Please.
Atlanta was nothing before Ryan came along. Then, all of a sudden they have a great defense, wide receivers, running backs, TE's, O-line? Please.
What were the Cardinals doing before Warner came along? Nothing.
What were the Saints doing before Brees came along? Nothing.
The Patriots were a "good" team before Brady came along. He turned them into a dynasty.
The Steelers were a good team before they brought in Roethlisberger, but now they are becoming a dynasty, because they have a quarterback who not only avoids the rush but breaks TACKLES (sacks) and turns them into first downs and touchdowns.

For everything that has been said here, IMO this list makes a point that is very very hard to argue against.

The three most essential things a team needs, QB, OL + PassRusher, are what we lack. How in the hell can anyone think we have a good team.

Nov 9, 2009 at 5:37 PM

#102

9ermj

Info N/A

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by boomer49er:Was it well when Snydey gave an end a free run at SMith which resulted in a fumble? Was it well when Smith was wrapped up at the same time that he got the ball from the center?

All QBs have bad games, you dont' bench them for it....we'll never be good again if you do that.

Please understand where I'm coming from. This isn't "Smith had a bad game let's bench him", this is pointing out that I don't think he's the answer, and our 2010 starting QB (or at least our future starting QB) is NOT on this roster. Not bench him, but rather, don't put yet another season (2010) into his hands.

I don't think they will but after 2 years on the bench and 2.5 games back how can they determine what they have in him. How would you feel if he was on his way and they let him go , only to have him turn into a good/great qb , while they start from scratch with say Tebow, as some have suggested, I know that's unlikely but that's what they are probably struggling with. I think the next 8 games will decide it

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:It's time we realize that Smith is simply not the answer. I think Shaun Hill is a great QB, but ultimately a great backup and not a sufficient starter. We need a QB because this is a QB league. What scares me is that we waste the years we have on the D on this bad QB and not allow ourselves to become a good team because of that. Bears and Ravens are teams that come to mind. Teams that couldn't get to the next level because of a lack at QB. The Texans were in a similar spot. When a good QB comes to a team the whole dynamic changes. Some QBs can function in systems, but unfortunately we don't have McDaniels to create a QB friendly system for us, and will need someone who has legitimate NFL talent. Smith is not clutch, he can't pick defenses apart, he's not a great leader and his athletic ability, while good, is nothing to write home about. Most of all, his accuracy is lacking. Here are some options

FA:
Just like the Saints did with Brees. Is there a good FA QB on the market? No way, there never is anymore.

Trade:
The one name that comes to mind is Kevin Kolb. I think he's a good QB, whose learned from one of the better QB experts in the game. He may be in a similar position that Shaub or Cassle were in.

Draft:
This seems like the obvious choice. Claussen, Tebow, Locker, Bradford, Snead, Pike, McCoy. One of these guys will be good. Not all, but at least one. Lets identify him and use our 2 first round picks wisely

Any other suggestions? We already have a QB on the roster? Blockbuster trade of all our picks for a starter? Hope Hassleback gets cut, etc. etc.??? (BTW, I just brought up these last 3 as alternatives, but clearly think all are terrible options).

Draft Tebow ????? I'm so glad your not the 49ers GM !

I will excuse the stupidity of your comment, for I will assume you didn't read what I wrote. Did I say daft Tebow? Or did I list a number of QBs and suggested that I believe at least ONE of them will be good. Personally I like Claussen. But please do explain how you know for certain that Tebow will not be a good QB? Surely the style of offense he plays in college makes him a very high risk player, and it makes it difficult to evaluate him as a pro QB, but he definitely has qualities that would suggest that he can make the transition. Perhaps you have actual insight, not just insults to throw around the board. Please do inform me.

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:we are a good team with a bad offensive line

Can't blame this game on the o-line. They weren't horrendous. they gave hime time he just takes a while lol. THis is a lack of a good qb loss. Smith didn't even give Crabrtee the time of day this afternoon, wtf!!

From MM Twitter:

Quote:Don't blame 49ers O-line for Sunday's loss. Protection held up well despite array of Titans' blitzes and 51 quarterback dropbacks.

Oline wasn't as bad as it has been. Still Smith wasn't getting the normal 3 seconds needed to pass.

Maybe they held up on the LEFT side, but the right side was a joke. Snyder was ridiculous and I counted at least 3 blown blocks. I don't know what MM was seeing, but it was clear Young had more time than Smith. Smith is playing because of his mobility - so just because you can OUTRUN sacks means the OL is better? Nope. Sorry I disagree with MM. The fumble Smith has was clearly because Snyder was beaten by a spin move on a 4-man rush.

Snyder was beaten, but if that happened to Tom Brady he would have simply stepped up in the pocket and completed a pass, and nobody would have cared that the RT let his guy get washed around to the outside.

You see if the quarterback steps up, it allows the tackles to recover on their block and simply "wash" the player around the pocket. However, if they don't step up, the quarterback has a good chance of getting hit.
Sometimes there is no space to step up, but on that play, there was clearly enough space.

Its tough to be critical, but sorry, this is the NFL, and pocket presence is the skill that separates the good quarterbacks from the rest.

Are you serious? Snyder was beat so quickly he didn't even have time to hold. If you would have watched Brady at the beginning of this year, you would have notice protection problems allowed the Broncos who aren't as talented BEAT the Broncos.

You have to be able to direct the pass rush to "wash" a player, and certainly your OGs have to be good enough to direct the rush. If it's simply an issue of "stepping up", Shaun Hill wouldn't be on the bench.

I find it near incredible that you are going to even compare our line to the WORST of the Patriot OL.

Just wow.

The only comparison I am making, is our quarterbacks vs Tom Brady. Which is obviously an extreme comparison, because Brady is, IMO, the best quarterback in the NFL and one of the best of all-time.

The extreme comparison serves to accentuate the fact that a quarterback can help his line by stepping up into the pocket.

Every time I have seen Brady play, he makes plays like this. He makes more than a handful each game. The rush comes around the edge, and he simply steps up in the pocket while continuously scanning down field, and then makes the throw.

There was a play he made this year, where his own lineman was pushed into him, and he simply took one step forward without even turning his head, and still completed the pass.

Do you think if a lineman ran into Smith from behind, he would react like that?
Smith would freak out (like most quarterbacks) and start sprinting out of the pocket, perhaps trying to scramble or find a route working back to him.

But Brady isn't the only quarterback who would have survived on that play.
Brady, McNabb, Roethlisberger, Manning, Warner, Romo, Favre, Palmer perhaps even Ryan and Flacco, would have stepped up into the empty space and given themselves more time.

Watch them play, they do it all the time. They make it look so routine that nobody bothers to realize how impressive they are at avoiding the pressure. Brady is the best of them all at this skill, which is why I use him as the most explicit example.

Every single one of those QBs have better OLs than the 49ers - and have had better lines for 2 years. Again, you can say it's just Smith but it's not. The 49ers are the only team in relations to those who rotate linemen 2 out of 5 positions on the right side. Remember starting Snyder for a series and then Rachal for series? That's a sign of a bad OL. Tony Pashos cut by the JAGS (who obviously has too much talent on their OL /sarcasm) is immediately better than the guy penciled in to start?

I do watch these guys play all the time. Let's look at McNabb. When he's harassed, he throws picks - like he did on Sunday night and a couple of weeks ago against the Raiders. Hill wasn't lighting it up before Alex started. The running game wasn't blowing opponents off the ball were they.

Every single one of those QBs have better coaching and talent at the OL than the 49ers. You extreme comparison only reinforces what I'm saying here:

The 49ers are not a good team and this is the ultimate team sport. Take your stopwatch and time, step-up or not, how quickly the rush even forces or alters the QBs rhythm. Say what you want about surviving or stepping up, none - and I mean none of those QBs do it EVERY play. 49er QBs (Smith, Hill) have to do it EVERY play.

Still, the common thread in each of those teams is that their quarterbacks are better than ours and lets face it, this is a QB driven league. We are a good team without a QB and a good O-line imo. But the O-line this game didn't lose us the game this week.

I think we have receivers that would hit their stride with an awesome QB and we know we have a good TE. A good TE that cannot stop drive killing penalties, but a good TE never the less.

We have a decent defense that is good enough to get us in the playoffs I believe. We still do lack a pass rush and for all the key names in the secondary it is appauling to me that we have that bad of a pass D. Number 2 rush D and terrible pass D. We do need some safety help, but overall a decent defense.

Pass D is dragging us out of the top 10 and into the 20's Very pathetic because I also believe we have a good coordinator in Manusky and a good HC in Singletary. That is my take, I could be way off base however that is how I see it

I do think this season is kind of toast but stranger things have happened. Our only wins in week one against AZ without key players, against Seattle without key players and against the Lambs. Just WOW. Kinda hard to keep the grin on

Yes, this a QB-driven league, but you don't need outstanding QB play to win. Last season, Miami, Atlanta, etc proved that if you have a solid running game and a solid defense you will be in contention.

The assumption is that we have the personnel in place to make a good decision on a QB, and furthermore - even develop one.

I totally disagree that the OL didn't "lose" us the game this week - it's like saying on defense, we didn't lose a game because we didn't need to get pressure on the QB from the DL. Trench play.

The QB play is better than our BECAUSE their OL is better. Warner was considered washed up 3 seasons ago and was considered nothing more than a back-up. Why? Because the Rams OL had broken down and it wasn't any good. Goes to Cardinals where a former Steeler OL coach replaces Warhop, they figure out how to pass block and the rest is history.

When your OL is bad, you are set-up to lose EVERY week because you can't consistently run the ball despite the defensive front. Why is Alex even starting? Why are we even going to a "spread" formation? Because this line can't run-block. Why do we pass more than run? Because they aren't a "power run" offense that blow open holes for their best offensive player.

So we have a crucible here - they can't run block and they have difficulty pass-protecting; isn't that - well offense? And this has been the case all season. How is this not attributed to the OL.

Sorry, but in all of the examples you use, if I compare man for man the OL those QBs play behind, they're head-and-shoulders playing better - and this is before Smith started. When we were a power rushing offense under Hill, we were on pace for tops in sacks allowed. A running team on pace for tops in the league for sacks allowed. Sorry, but that's not just the QB.

I'm not saying bench him after this game but given the fact that he dropped back nearly 50 times he really did have plenty of time to throw most of the game, not tons of time but decent pockets and decent pass protection. You can't blame bad throws on the O-line.

That last INT which he stared down his receiver like a pop warner WB he had time to throw. He just made the play so easy for the defense by staring down his receiver. I think we do however need to find a better QB in the offseason and unload everyone but Davis. I think Davis can be better than Hill with some practice and reps.

This site is neither endorsed, nor sponsored by, nor affiliated with San Francisco 49ers or NFL Properties LLC. 49ers is a registered trademark of the San Francisco 49ers LLC. All teams and players mentioned are registered trademarks of the NFL and its respective teams. The use of any team names, words, trademarks, logos or photos have been used for descriptive purposes only. The content and information from other sites is the property of their respective owners. Player and team photos used with permission from USA TODAY Sports Images.